Receive the latest national-international updates in your inbox

How often can residents call police before they face eviction? That’s what the American Civil Liberties Union and an attorney representing Norristown are arguing over in federal court today. NBC10’s Monique Braxton has the story. (Published Thursday, Sep 19, 2013)

Updated at 4:51 PM EDT on Thursday, Sep 19, 2013

Imagine getting kicked out of your home because you called police after your ex-boyfriend beat you up too many times.

That is exactly the dilemma Lakisha Briggs, 33, faced in June of last year when her ex-boyfriend, Wilbert Bennett, arrived at her home and threatened and brutally beat her.

“You are going to be with me or you are going to be with no one,” he allegedly threatened, according to police.

Briggs says she did not call police because this would have made her third call to authorities from her home she rented with a Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 8 voucher. A Norristown law orders landlords to evict tenants after three 911 calls within four months. City officials say it's designed to promote peaceful neighborhoods and discourage nuisance calls.

“She was so afraid to call the police after the third incident when her property was placed in a probationary period when her former boyfriend attacked her in her house. He bit and tore her lip, he struck her across her lip with a glass astray and then took shards of the glass astray and jabbed it into her neck. Before she passed out she refused to call police because she was afraid of losing her home,” said Peter Smith, a private lawyer working with the American Civil Liberties Union, told NBC10.com Thursday.

A neighbor eventually called, over Briggs' protests, and the severely injured Briggs was airlifted to a hospital.

“This woman was being battered in her home and was silenced,” said Smith.

A federal judge on Thursday ordered a trial to decide whether towns can force the eviction of tenants who make too many 911 calls, a national test case pitting free speech rights against community safety concerns.

U.S. District Judge Eduardo Robreno said he expects the “complex and novel” case to reach a federal appeals court.

At the hearing, Robreno denied the township's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, but he also rejected the ACLU's bid for a temporary injunction, since city officials have agreed not to pursue any action against Briggs through her landlord. The landlord, Darren Sudman, supports Briggs and calls her a good tenant, although she has since moved.

“I felt like I was being punished for being assaulted,” Briggs told The Associated Press last month.

Hundreds of communities around the country have passed similar tenant rules, according to the ACLU.

The lawsuit alleges the ordinances disproportionately affect women, since they are more often the victims of domestic violence, and that the federal Violence Against Women Act protects their housing rights.

Norristown officials amended its ordinance in December to give landlords a chance to appeal any three-strikes fines in court. And the city said it hasn't been enforcing the code this year, given the lawsuit. But it believes the law is both fair and valuable.

“They're trying to preserve the peaceful enjoyment of the neighborhood,” lawyer Robert P. DiDomenicis argued Thursday. “These restrictions are not onerous.”

According to court papers, police were called to Briggs' home 10 times in the first five months of 2012. The ex-boyfriend is back in jail after a conviction for attacking her.

Norristown's revised ordinance grants exceptions for certain true emergencies, but is meant to address disorderly conduct, DiDomenicis said. It also provides landlords the right to appeal the police fine.

But the ACLU believes police have too much discretion to decide what constitutes a danger versus a disturbance. And while landlords may appeal, the tenants who ultimately face eviction have no such right. Robreno himself wondered if landlords wouldn't take the easy way out.

“Instead of challenging the strikes, he'll just get rid of the tenant?” the judge asked Smith.